Tuesday, June 21, 2016

The Gun Control Farce

Surely murder is a serious subject, which ought to be examined
seriously. Instead, it is almost always examined politically in the
context of gun control controversies, with stock arguments on both sides
that have remained the same for decades. And most of those arguments
are irrelevant to the central question: Do tighter gun control laws
reduce the murder rate?

That is not an esoteric question,
nor one for which no empirical evidence is available. Think about it.

We
have 50 states, each with its own gun control laws, and many of those
laws have gotten either tighter or looser over the years. There must be
tons of data that could indicate whether murder rates went up or down
when either of these things happened.

But have you ever heard any
gun control advocate cite any such data? Tragically, gun control has
become one of those fact-free issues that spawn outbursts of emotional
rhetoric and mutual recriminations about the National Rifle Association
or the Second Amendment.

If restrictions on gun ownership do
reduce murders, we can repeal the Second Amendment, as other
Constitutional Amendments have been repealed. Laws exist to protect
people. People do not exist to perpetuate laws.

But if tighter
restrictions on gun ownership do not reduce murders, what is the point
of tighter gun control laws -- and what is the point of demonizing the
National Rifle Association?
There are data not only from our 50
states but also from other countries around the world. Professor Joyce
Lee Malcolm's empirical study, "Guns and Violence: The English
Experience," should be eye-opening for all those who want their eyes
opened, however small that number of people might be.

Professor Malcolm's book also illustrates the difference between isolated, cherry-picked facts and relevant empirical evidence.

Many
gun control advocates have cited the much higher murder rates in the
United States than in England as due to tighter gun control laws in
England. But Professor Malcolm's study points out that the murder rate
in New York has been some multiple of the murder rate in London for two
centuries -- and, during most of that time, neither city had serious
restrictions on gun ownership.

As late as 1954, "there were no
controls on shotguns" in England, Professor Malcolm reported, but only
12 cases of armed robbery in London. Of these only 4 had real guns. But
in the remainder of the 20th century, gun control laws became ever more
severe -- and armed robberies in London soared to 1,400 by 1974.

"As
the numbers of legal firearms have dwindled, the numbers of armed
crimes have risen" is her summary of that history in England.
Conversely, in the United States the number of handguns in American
homes more than doubled between 1973 and 1992, while the murder rate
went down.

There are relevant facts available, but you are not
likely to hear about them from politicians currently pushing for tighter
gun control laws, or from the mainstream media, when those facts go
against the claims of gun control advocates.

Despite hundreds of thousands of times a year when
Americans use firearms defensively, none of those incidents is likely to
be reported in the mainstream media, even when lives are saved as a
result.

But one accidental firearm death in a home will be broadcast and
rebroadcast from coast to coast.

Virtually all empirical studies
in the United States show that tightening gun control laws has not
reduced crime rates in general or murder rates in particular. Is this
because only people opposed to gun control do empirical studies? Or is
it because the facts uncovered in empirical studies make the arguments
of gun control zealots untenable?

In both England and the United
States, those people most zealous for tighter gun control laws tend also
to be most lenient toward criminals and most restrictive on police. The
net result is that law-abiding citizens become more vulnerable when
they are disarmed and criminals disobey gun control laws, as they
disobey other laws.

The facts are too plain to be ignored.
Moreover, the consequences are too dangerous to law-abiding citizens,
whose lives are put in jeopardy on the basis of fact-free assumptions
and unexamined dogmas. Such arguments are a farce, but not the least bit
funny.

Followers

Follow My Posts by Email

The Patriot Factor

I’m an American Patriot...part of the grassroots movement of bloggers spreading the truth about the corrupt and traitorous Obama regime and his sanctioned islamization of America. I'm also co-host with Craig Andresen of RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on American Political Radio. http://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/